3 ms·

You are assuming government is immune to all of the exploitation desires that businesses are not, and that is not true.

• saraid216 14y ago
  It's not immune, but governments tend to be formed with the mandate to prevent those exploitations. This makes them more resistant to those desires. The more people in that government, the more social pressure there is to keep those exploitations minimal so that they can remain undetected. That's what the difference between a government and a business is. They are otherwise the same.
  • snitko 14y ago
    I don't see how staying in the office for 4 years practically indefinitely, makes you more resistant to exploit the opportunities it provides. On the other hand, when business does something customers don't like, it loses customers, money and goes out of business very quickly (unless it is bailed out by the government!).
    • saraid216 14y ago
      > I don't see how staying in the office for 4 years practically indefinitely I don't see how this is a necessary requirement of government. Instead of answering you directly, I'd suggest reading this: http://www.amazon.com/The-Origins-Political-Order-Revolution/dp/0374227349 http://www.amazon.com/The-Origins-Political-Order-Revolution...
  • snitko 14y ago
    Also, in my view, the problem with your argument is that your expectations of government (preventing exploitations) is rather different from reality (picking winners). Just because many people believe that government is supposed to do good, doesn't make it act this way.
    • saraid216 14y ago
      I never said it was perfect. I simply said it was harder. A government has a much harder time being exploitative than a business does. To the extent that a government's personnel are involved in businesses, the government is corrupted and its resistance to exploitative desires will break down.